Re: OT: Vista Basic...the Right Choice?

On Jun 17, 5:02 pm, "Daddy" <da...@not.valid.net> wrote:
> Vista Basic might just be the right choice for your next desktop computer:
>
> *If you're not into eye candy, why should Aero suck the life out of your hardware?
>
> *If you're already using your favorite third-party software, why bloat your footprint with Microsoft's DVD maker, backup, encryption, etc.
>
> Seems to me that Vista Basic is a step in the direction of what many people have been wanting for years--a slimmed-down version of the OS.
>
> Of course Vista Basic won't work for everyone, but unless you have a tablet PC; or you're heavily invested in Microsoft applications like Movie Maker or Media Center; or unless your employer is moving to standardize around Microsoft utilities like Meeting Space, it seems to me that Vista Basic could be all a savvy user really needs.
>
> Agree or disagree?
>
> Daddy

I use Basic (it came with the laptop), and whatever I use Windows
for it is just fine; I haven't noticed *anything* that I would need
that
is missing.

But, when choosing which edition to get ... if money weren't a factor
I would *always* go with a more complete edition (say, Business).
You can turn off everything you don't need (it may take a little bit
of
research to find out how), and it is more of a system. An example:
we needed to put a computer on the network here at work, and the
admins demand to use domains ... and Basic doesn't 'support' it.
Why, on Earth? I think this is simply a feature of an OS -- that has
been 'cut out' of this Edition. You may not need networking much,
of course, but these kinds of 'features' (removed ones) make me
rather nervous about an OS.

I specifically do not mean to enter any unpleasant exchanges, but,
in my view, what 'Bob Levine' told you in his first post in this
thread
seemed to me to be his opinion on your question (which is shared
by many): that Basic is a crippled piece.

Thanks for your reply.

I did not know about domains (which I don't care about anyway) but it's that
kind of information - that was not described in the Microsoft comparison I
listed - that would be helpful to know.

Based strictly on the comparisons published by Microsoft, Vista Basic seems
like a good choice for very many users. But if there are additional
differences beyond what's been published, those might turn out to be
deal-killers.

Daddy

"Zack" <> wrote in message
news:18542cf5-d823-4f16-a21a-...
> On Jun 17, 5:02 pm, "Daddy" <da...@not.valid.net> wrote:
>> Vista Basic might just be the right choice for your next desktop
>> computer:
>>
>> *If you're not into eye candy, why should Aero suck the life out of
>> your hardware?
>>
>> *If you're already using your favorite third-party software, why
>> bloat your footprint with Microsoft's DVD maker, backup, encryption, etc.
>>
>> Seems to me that Vista Basic is a step in the direction of what many
>> people have been wanting for years--a slimmed-down version of the OS.
>>
>> Of course Vista Basic won't work for everyone, but unless you have a
>> tablet PC; or you're heavily invested in Microsoft applications like
>> Movie Maker or Media Center; or unless your employer is moving to
>> standardize around Microsoft utilities like Meeting Space, it seems to me
>> that Vista Basic could be all a savvy user really needs.
>>
>> Agree or disagree?
>>
>> Daddy
>
> I use Basic (it came with the laptop), and whatever I use Windows
> for it is just fine; I haven't noticed *anything* that I would need
> that
> is missing.
>
> But, when choosing which edition to get ... if money weren't a factor
> I would *always* go with a more complete edition (say, Business).
> You can turn off everything you don't need (it may take a little bit
> of
> research to find out how), and it is more of a system. An example:
> we needed to put a computer on the network here at work, and the
> admins demand to use domains ... and Basic doesn't 'support' it.
> Why, on Earth? I think this is simply a feature of an OS -- that has
> been 'cut out' of this Edition. You may not need networking much,
> of course, but these kinds of 'features' (removed ones) make me
> rather nervous about an OS.
>
> I specifically do not mean to enter any unpleasant exchanges, but,
> in my view, what 'Bob Levine' told you in his first post in this
> thread
> seemed to me to be his opinion on your question (which is shared
> by many): that Basic is a crippled piece.